Re: [PATCH v4 11/12] convert: add filter.<driver>.process option
- From
Lars Schneider <larsxschneider@gmail.com>
- Date
- Aug 5, 2016, 21:49 UTC
- Message-ID
- <59C5366C-AB41-49D9-8FFF-F109AF242580@gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <2e13c31c-5ee2-890d-1268-98fb67aba1ea@web.de>
Show 31 quoted lines
> On 05 Aug 2016, at 23:34, Torsten Bögershausen <tboegi@web.de> wrote: > > On 2016-08-03 18.42, larsxschneider@gmail.com wrote: >> The filter is expected to respond with the result content in zero >> or more pkt-line packets and a flush packet at the end. Finally, a >> "result=success" packet is expected if everything went well. >> ------------------------ >> packet: git< SMUDGED_CONTENT >> packet: git< 0000 >> packet: git< result=success\n >> ------------------------ > I would really send the diagnostics/return codes before the content. > >> If the result content is empty then the filter is expected to respond >> only with a flush packet and a "result=success" packet. >> ------------------------ >> packet: git< 0000 >> packet: git< result=success\n >> ------------------------ > > Which may be: > > packet: git< result=success\n > packet: git< SMUDGED_CONTENT > packet: git< 0000 > > or for an empty file: > > packet: git< result=success\n > packet: git< SMUDGED_CONTENT > packet: git< 0000
I think you meant: packet: git< result=success\n packet: git< 0000
Right?
Show 6 quoted lines
> > or in case of an error: > packet: git< result=reject\n > # And this will not send the "0000" packet > > Does this makes sense ?
I see your point. However, I think your suggestion would not work in the true streaming case as the filter wouldn't know upfront if the operation will succeed, right?
Thanks for the review, Lars